Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login

Secular Humanity - December 2007

President George W. Bush. Hard to argue that he has been anything but the worst president - if not in American history (my feeling) at least in the modern era. But in his weekly radio address he said he would resolve to do some things differently in the coming year. The last year of his dismal presidency, thankfully!

"My resolution for the New Year is this: to work with Congress to keep our economy growing, to keep your tax burden low, and to ensure that the money you send to Washington is spent wisely - or not at all." Congratulations, Mr. Bush, you are going to work with Congress. And keep taxes low for average Americans. And end wasteful spending like, say, no-bid contracts to Halliburton or energy deals for Iraqi oil going to Texas billionaires. There are even rumors you think some action needs to be taken to combat global warming! Good boy, George!


But of course, Mr. Bush is even less likely to keep his resolutions than the millions of Americans who will pledge to lose weight. To Bush, "working with Congress" means they do what he tells them. "Keeping your tax burden low" applies to his treasured top few, the wealthy who need relief the least. And his pledging to ensure money spent by his Administration is "spent wisely" is the biggest laugher of all.

Bush focused on the economy, apparently becoming aware that his policies are pushing it into a recession. He didn't address international issues, staying away from the crisis in Pakistan or his "war" in Iraq. Mr. Bush seems to feel that soothing words from him will convince Americans that all is rosy and to just stop worrying and go shopping. Personally, I think it is a little sad, how Americans react to economic news.

First, if anyone was willing to listen, sound voices have been saying for years that the great free-for-all of rampant deficit spending, tax give-aways to the rich, a rapidly declining dollar, rising consumer debt, and a fire-sale mortgage market were a recipe for disaster. Still, many kept their heads in the sand, and Mr. Bush is encouraging them to keep it that way.


Second, I am saddened that immediate pocketbook issues always move to the front when they trend downward. So many chose to ignore the attacks on American freedoms, the incompetency and inaction, the wholly inept actions internationally, and the overall dangerous nature of the Bush leadership. When their personal economic outlook catches up with his idiocy, then they are ready to abandon him. The writing has been on the wall for years, people!

What Americans need to do is to completely reject the neo-con agenda. Completely and convincingly. Run 'em all out, and give progressives a shot. If I'm wrong doesn't help America dramatically, I'll shut up and let conservatives run things. Of course, I know better.
62
Vote
   


Merry Christmas! And good riddance..

December 23rd 2007 18:35
Don't get me wrong, there are some things about Christmas I like. The lighted boats that cruise the rivers, the little streets where everyone does a fanciful display, The Nutcracker...but it is all becoming overwhelmed more each year by what I don't like. The crass consumerism, the idiocy exhibited by so many who gleefully march into more debt, the waste. And most of all, the ever-increasing whining of Christian fundamentalists about their imagined "war" on Christmas. By the time the day passes on the 25th, I will be one of many that is happy to see it go, and wouldn't mind a bit if it faded in importance. If it were just another religious holiday the rest of us could ignore, that would be great. Like Easter or Passover or Hanukkah or Lent or Ramadan. If a person isn't deeply involved religiously, they can ignore those days. But not good old in-your-face Christmas.

Personally, I like New Year's Day. To me, it's about so much more than Christmas. It's not a celebration of a particular mythology, nor is it nearly so overtly consumerist. It's about renewal and reflection, promise and pause. New Year's Day represents a "clean slate." Sure, we all have ideas what we will put on that slate, and some of it will be dictated for us. Still, it is a time for optimism and hope mingled with remembrance of the last year.

My wife's family is in Ukraine, and we spent last New Year's there. It is a big holiday, with huge family feasts and parties. The way it is celebrated there is alot more than just watching a ball or singing a song. It's what Christmas could be, if it wasn't what it has become. Gifts are exchanged, but there isn't the fever pitch. Santa (Grandfather Frost) visits the children, and there are fireworks everywhere.

It's a much better winter holiday because it is a holiday for everyone. Christmas there is exactly what it should be, a religious holiday for those who wish to celebrate it. The timing helps. Christmas is observed according to Eastern Orthodox traditions, which places it after New Year's Day. January 7th is the date and it is in the shadow of New Year's Day, not the other way around. So everyone gets a wonderful winter holiday, and the religious get their observance.

I would love to see such a separation occur in America. There is no "war" on Christmas. but those of us who aren't caught up in it would like to be able to step back from all the hoopla. I would think that the deeply religious would join me in my sentiment. They can hardly say that Christmas in America is a day following in the teachings of Christ. They should welcome a separation of a secular winter celebration and a religious day.
84
Vote
   


When Vladimir Vladimorovich Putin took the helm as Russia's president, he was leading a country economically decimated by the fall of the Soviet Union and the subsequent devastations of "free market" capitalism. He will be leaving the presidency with a Russia that has re-established itself on the world stage and has seen robust economic growth. He also has rolled back some civil liberties and tightened controls on Russia's press. All by himself he is both Russia's "good cop" and it's bad.

Therein lies the danger of rapidly expanding executive power. It can resemble the "box of chocolates" of Forrest Gump. You never know what leader you will get. In Russia's case Putin has been very beneficial to most Russians, presiding over rapid economic growth and increasing world stature. But you can just as easily get someone like George W. Bush. Once the power is given, it's hard to take back. Of course, there are myriad differences between the Russian and American experiences with expanded executive power, but the illustration given does provide food for thought.

Perhaps the most striking difference between the experiences of Russia and America when it comes to the expansion of executive power is the measured support of the people. While Putin enjoys wide support across the board, Bush is regarded by most Americans as a very lame duck, striving to salvage anything positive from his dismal presidency. Putin is regarded as bringing Russia back from the brink of total economic chaos. In fact, all of the positives given to Mr. Putin are opposites to the Bush legacy.

Person of the Year
V. V. Putin


Putin has fought rampant corruption, Bush has seen it grow in leaps and bounds. Putin has strengthened his economy, while Bush has undercut the American economy. Putin's government has paid off it's debt, Bush has caused America's to skyrocket. Putin has increased Russia's stature in the international community, Mr Bush...well, you get the point.

The dangerous side of Mr. Putin's rise is that he is not all that concerned with civil liberties and/or a free press. While I would argue that he is not nearly as tyrannical as portrayed by much of the western media, he has consolidated power and suppressed opposition to dangerous levels. And as I pointed out earlier, no matter how good for the country a shift to more authoritarian style leadership might be in the short run, without ending it once reforms are over, the outcome will not be good. Putin has indicated he will become prime minister after his current term as president ends. He fully intends to be very much a part of the Russian government. He needs to use his time wisely, and help to bring checks and balances into play that will allow Russia to become fully democratic while keeping his country moving forward.

The problem, of course, is that he most likely won't do that. The Russian people have chosen stability over some freedoms. And as bad as Russia was after the fall of the Soviet Union, it is understandable, especially since they have a leader who has done so well by them. Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin has done exceptional things for Russia. Now, he must do the extraordinary. He must ensure that his legacy will not just be a stronger and richer Russia, but also one that is more free.
92
Vote
   


Fox News and "The Cost of Freedom"

December 15th 2007 19:40
In Going through the channels this morning I stopped by good old Faux News, and spent a few minutes taking in the drivel that seems to always be available there. They have a Saturday morning show called the "The Cost of Freedom" which also includes segments like "Bulls and Bears," "Cashin' in," and "Forbes on Fox." While I don't have a stomach nearly strong enough to sit through the whole neo-con/big business love fest, I did hear some startling comments. And I'm sorry, each topic I write about doesn't have direct quotes to individuals, as I just really don't care who all the mouthpieces are. Sure, they have a token liberal - with about the same credibility as Hannity's sidekick, Colmes.

Both last week and this week they talked about the housing market. Seems the thought process for most of the analysts there is screw the borrower, and let the chips fall. They seem to think that the entire crisis has been brought on by people wanting more house than they can afford. To a degree, their right - good old American greed. Keeping up with the Joneses and all. They fail to point out that egregious and misleading lending practices are also in play, and every bit as much to blame. There seemed to be a shared sentiment that to help sub-prime borrowers in trouble would hurt the housing market. I've got news, the market is already hurting. Not to brag, but I predicted this market two years ago. And I predict the downside will deepen. How much depends on a few factors, like if the American electorate is stupid enough to elect another neo-con


[ Click here to read more ]
63
Vote
   


As an American I am wanting a debate as to whether American influence in the world right now is a good thing or a bad thing. Of course, there are nuances that would say both, and it is impossible to say that American influence is either all good or all bad. What I want to draw out is the following:

What is good about American influence? Culture, films, food, political influence, perceptions, etc...and what is bad along the same points. I am certain had this question been posed prior to the "Bush years" it would have drawn a much more American-friendly repsonse then I expect it to now. There are many, many things I love about my country. And many things I do not. Lately, the "do not's" seem to be growing much faster


[ Click here to read more ]
168
Vote
   


On day after a new national intelligence estimate (NIE) came out saying that Iran ended its nuclear program in 2003, Mr. Bush felt compelled to hold a press conference and spin the NIE to the context of his twisted views. In spite of the fact the he essentially had his drum taken from him by the American intelligence agencies and the NIE, Mr. Bush can't help himself. He knows the clock is ticking on his debacle of an Administration. He also knows that he is rolling the dice if he counts on the next president to push war. So he feels he has to act soon.

He spoke to the press this morning showing his trademark petulance and arrogance. Kieth Olbermann put it well when commenting earlier this year. Olbermann said Bush was "acting more and more like we interrupted him when he was watching his favorite cartoons on the DVR," and I agree. Bush seems driven more by rescuing some sort of "legacy" than anything else. Too bad he wants a legacy that would include a wrecked economy, further environmental degradation, larger wars, weakened government (FEMA, FDA, FAA, VA, etc) and a badly damaged American image abroad. He seems bent on making sure that the only people who benefit from his eight years in office are the super rich and the leaders of the religious right. His entire presidency is a "faith based initiative" and most of the world has lost faith


[ Click here to read more ]
67
Vote
   


More Posts
1 Posts
7 Posts
1 Posts
220 Posts dating from July 2007
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:

Sleepy Coder's Blogs

5208 Vote(s)
14 Comment(s)
85 Post(s)
Moderated by Sleepy Coder
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]